The Dearth of the Author: Philip Massinger and the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio

Eoin Price
{"title":"The Dearth of the Author: Philip Massinger and the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio","authors":"Eoin Price","doi":"10.1093/res/hgac079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In 1647, Humphrey Moseley and Humphrey Robinson published a folio collection of unpublished works which they attributed to Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, two writers famous for their collaborations from 1606 to 1613. But in affording Beaumont a place on the title page, the publishers misattributed the volume. Scholars now accept that Beaumont had very little direct input in the collection whereas Philip Massinger, who began collaborating with Fletcher soon after Beaumont’s retirement, had a very significant, unacknowledged role in the collected plays. This essay offers the first extended discussion of why it was that Massinger was written out of this canon-defining volume. I argue first that Massinger was by many accounts a popular and vendible dramatist, whose omission from the folio had little to do with him having a poor reputation. Instead, I suggest that the reputation of the names Beaumont and Fletcher, established in the preceding decades, proved irresistible to the publishers. Furthermore, I argue that Massinger’s reputation as a distinctive solo playwright also counted against him, making it harder to apprehend him as a prolific collaborator. Next, I demonstrate how the 1647 folio participated in a process of canonization which elided Massinger’s significant collaborative contribution and discuss the distorting effect this has had on our understanding of Beaumont, Fletcher, Massinger, and playwrighting practice more broadly. I end by pointing towards some ways of rectifying the historical elision of Massinger’s collaboration with Fletcher.","PeriodicalId":255318,"journal":{"name":"The Review of English Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Review of English Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/res/hgac079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1647, Humphrey Moseley and Humphrey Robinson published a folio collection of unpublished works which they attributed to Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, two writers famous for their collaborations from 1606 to 1613. But in affording Beaumont a place on the title page, the publishers misattributed the volume. Scholars now accept that Beaumont had very little direct input in the collection whereas Philip Massinger, who began collaborating with Fletcher soon after Beaumont’s retirement, had a very significant, unacknowledged role in the collected plays. This essay offers the first extended discussion of why it was that Massinger was written out of this canon-defining volume. I argue first that Massinger was by many accounts a popular and vendible dramatist, whose omission from the folio had little to do with him having a poor reputation. Instead, I suggest that the reputation of the names Beaumont and Fletcher, established in the preceding decades, proved irresistible to the publishers. Furthermore, I argue that Massinger’s reputation as a distinctive solo playwright also counted against him, making it harder to apprehend him as a prolific collaborator. Next, I demonstrate how the 1647 folio participated in a process of canonization which elided Massinger’s significant collaborative contribution and discuss the distorting effect this has had on our understanding of Beaumont, Fletcher, Massinger, and playwrighting practice more broadly. I end by pointing towards some ways of rectifying the historical elision of Massinger’s collaboration with Fletcher.
作者的匮乏:菲利普·马辛格与博蒙特和弗莱彻对开本
1647年,汉弗莱·莫斯利和汉弗莱·罗宾逊出版了一本未出版作品的对开本合集,他们认为这是弗朗西斯·博蒙特和约翰·弗莱彻的作品,这两位作家在1606年至1613年间的合作而闻名。但是,在给博蒙特提供扉页上的位置时,出版商错误地注明了这本书的出处。学者们现在承认博蒙特在收藏中几乎没有直接的贡献,而菲利普·马辛格,在博蒙特退休后不久就开始与弗莱彻合作,在收集的戏剧中扮演了一个非常重要的,未被承认的角色。这篇文章提供了第一个扩展的讨论,为什么是马辛格写出来的经典定义的卷。我首先认为,从很多方面来说,马辛格都是一位受欢迎的、卖座的剧作家,他没有出现在对开本中与他名声不佳没有什么关系。相反,我认为博蒙特和弗莱彻这两个名字在过去几十年里建立起来的声誉对出版商来说是不可抗拒的。此外,我认为马辛格作为一个独特的独角戏剧作家的名声也对他不利,这使得人们更难理解他是一个多产的合作者。接下来,我将展示1647年的对开本是如何被封为圣徒的,这一过程忽略了马辛格的重要合作贡献,并讨论这对我们对博蒙特、弗莱彻、马辛格和更广泛的剧作家实践的理解产生了扭曲的影响。最后,我指出了一些纠正马辛格与弗莱彻合作的历史遗漏的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信